Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Annie Carlson plays the AoD combat demo

Double Ogre

Scholar
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
765
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/in ... opic=991.0
Annie Carlson said:
AoD feedback

(NOTE: I understand this is for the hardcore and I know combat needs to be balanced. I definitely play my share of hardcore games and know that the audience likes to be challenged. That said, impressions follow)

ART

* pointer seems to be too big – a little unwieldy with the haft of the spear in there. Reduce to 50%, maybe 75% at least?
* If possible, do subset illustrations of body part under where item is supposed to go (light outline of torso under Body, head under Head, an open pouch under Belt Pouch, etc)
* Maybe make HP have more screen real estate, or change color (as per Fallout) when it gets really low?
* Iffy on the grid disappearing and reappearing all the time – jarring at first, but I did get a little more used to it (was like “whuh?” when it appeared during my Attacks of Opportunity)
* Not sure where to put arrows/bolts in character screen
* Scroll is omg so fidgety – in battle it doesn’t want to move down, but otherwise one nudge and it’ll move all over the place (implement screen scroll lock to a certain character boundary?)
* Store scrollbar is too small
* BUG: when I used the net, the sword I’d been using didn’t reappear in my hand (and I attacked thereafter with Amazing Invisible Blade)
* Loot spot currently locked to feet – difficult to follow when body has fallen. Is there a way to move this?
* If possible, would like different color placed on item when there isn’t enough AP for an attack
* Store could use a min/max button for quick sales of multiple items (like throwing knives)
* Animations are really nice. I like the death anims and the careful backstepping from backing up.
* The trade window is nice, although I’d really like to be able to actively compare what I have equipped with what I’m planning on buying.
* Options screen needs to visually define what the high and low boundaries are (I dunno if I’m turning shadows up or down right now L) You probably already know this but I’ma BAWWWW about it just in case.



PLAYTHROUGH (played hammer & shield, dagger & shield [but mainly dodge], spear, bow, crossbow, axe & shield)

* I like the different attack options. By and large those seem to work out nicely and be well-balanced with AP.
* I feel like even with a very high skill, I’m missing all the time, and enemies are making a pincushion out of me even with a ton of points in Dodge or Block
* I swear to god that crossbow guy needs to die. Like for reals, and for all time, forever, in every single game ever. Chasing around his bitch ass is a killer.
* Having ranged stuff cause knockdown seems kind of insane – putting it essentially on the same footing as getting smacked in the chest with a sledgehammer seems really weird. I know IRL a heavy crossbow round can nearly bowl you over, but it seems insanely frustrating to be knocked over with one measly arrow or bolt – especially when you’re using so much AP just to get close to the guy.
* Speaking of ranged, it does way too much damage 4 reelz. When it can compare to a sturdy weapon like an axe that I put a kajillion points in I feel confused, like I did something wrong.
* A lot of combat – with ranged in particular – tends to feel more like luck than skill. It’s like looking at a rock that’s JUUUUUST underwater. I can see the influence there and it’s solid, it just feels like it’s obfuscated too much by a lot of missing and not knowing really how much value I’m actually getting from the points I put into a skill.
* I really like the net. I was all TOSS and then like MUAHAHA FUCK YOU CROSSBOW GUY and I like that weapon. It’s very much worth the money it costs.
* Having my shield destroyed feels like I just want to scream and reload. Sometimes that’s precious coinage wasted there, and if you’ve poured your points into Block instead of Dodge, you are basically proper fucked. If they could even just be repaired (and/or damaged so it only provides 75-50% of the cover) that would be at least a marginal comfort rather than a straight-up loss.
* If crossbows automatically switched to the “reload” option after you fired them that would be helpful and awesome. Even if you didn’t select it, it would be something reminding you that you needed to, and saving you the time of switching to it. (This would be to the last ammo you were using, as if you wanted a different type you could opt to manually select it)
* I worry that if you don’t put all your points into one thing, it seems like you’re kind of screwed, that you can’t diversify your skills. I’ve seen other skills go up as certain ones do, but I’m not sure how that equation works out.
* Would love it if Range was listed in Weapon Properties – and DEFINITELY if the weapon was 1 or 2-handed: not all of the descriptions make that clear.
* Is there a shield bash?
* BUG: dori (spear) says it can be used 1-handed but won’t allow me to use it with a shield
* I wish I got more money L Especially early on.
* More HP?
* BUG: blocking seems to make my character turn 180-degrees for some weird reason
* QUESTION: what role will potions play in the combat in AoD? Are they a quickslotted thing, is it expected that the player will have them as a common disposable item and use them a lot, or are they super-dee-dooper rare?
* DR seems to be very carefully metered – almost to the point where a 1 point gain doesn’t seem worth it for some of the associated penalties.
* There are lots of examples of better armor, but none of better shields L
* Aimed Strike for Torso almost doesn’t seem worth it sometimes, as the reflected damage doesn’t seem worth the AP – better to just risk a Power Attack
* Is the DR for the helms only for head attacks? It seems like the AI never uses those
* Argh the polearm guy keeps backing up and I don’t get my Attacks of Opportunity on him, what the crap
* I can’t stand crits on the player – you get 2 of those and you’re absolutely screwed. Will there be an option/mode to not allow that? (I know, I know, BAWWWW. But it seems less like “Argh I knew that would happen I left myself open there” and more like “wtf that lucky son of a bitch I will KILL THE WHOLE WORLD”)



Overall, please don’t let this tone mislead you. The base format of the combat I find very fun and interesting, the world looks great, and I’m impressed with the dialogue (the fight barks get a little repetitive and Brian said that they had good curses in the HBO series Rome that mostly apparently had to do with dogs, pigs, and people’s mothers, and I suggested the phrase “a sweaty swine’s foreskin” as a fun little starter curse. Hee. I like to say bad things). I wanted to run around and check out a larger world, and the demo made me crave this experience keenly. I think there are a lot of things that need to be worked out with the combat to make it more challenging than frustrating, difficult but not overly punishing. But I think those are definitely easily within the realm of possibility, and I’m looking forward to seeing that happen.


-Annie
 

Andhaira

Arcane
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
1,868,956
Thats informative. And yes, ranged enemies can be a pain in the ass.

Get chopping Vaultdweller.
 

spectre

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
5,370
The game's shaping up. Me like what I read so far.

Ranged weapons are deadly, the way they're supposed to be. I approve.

It also seems there's quite a bit o tactics involved in the system and the AI actually 'gets it' how to use different weapons - see the spear guy comment.

Waiting for the demo. Should be loads of fun.
 

Nedrah

Erudite
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
1,693
Location
Germany
I can't wait to get my hands on the demo, not to mention the full game. Funny how a list of problems with combat makes me really want to play it myself. Sounds like the way things are balanced should make for some pretty interesting tactical situations. Meh, is it thursday, yet?
 

asper

Arcane
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
2,206
Project: Eternity
More than half of what she mentions really needs to be looked into.

Man... Well, there goes another year.

It seems to be worth the wait though :)
 

Elhoim

Iron Tower Studio
Developer
Joined
Oct 27, 2006
Messages
2,878
Location
San Isidro, Argentina
Nedrah said:
I can't wait to get my hands on the demo, not to mention the full game. Funny how a list of problems with combat makes me really want to play it myself. Sounds like the way things are balanced should make for some pretty interesting tactical situations. Meh, is it thursday, yet?

It's coming out on Wednesday. Actually, the game demo should come out on Wednesday, and the combat demo on Tuesday.
 

Vaarna_Aarne

Notorious Internet Vandal
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
34,585
Location
Cell S-004
MCA Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2
From that list of bugs and tweak suggestions, it certainly appears that Vince and co are on the finishing streak.
 

Silellak

Cipher
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,198
Location
Tucson, AZ
The actual thread on the ITS forums is pretty interesting, and has feedback from VD on some of Annie's concerns, despite a couple of de-rail attempts.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Code:
//enemy spotted!
$phrase_enemy_spotted0 = "This should be fun.";
$phrase_enemy_spotted1 = "Prepare to die!";
$phrase_enemy_spotted2 = "I'm gonna fuck you up!";
$phrase_enemy_spotted3 = "Let's see how tough you are!";

//Combat
//threats
$phrase_combat_generic0 = "Come on, I aint got all day.";
$phrase_combat_generic1 = "You don't look like much.";
$phrase_combat_generic2 = "Let's get it over with.";

//NPC is hit
$phrase_combat_pain0 = "Fuck!";
$phrase_combat_pain1 = "Shit, I'm bleeding!";
$phrase_combat_pain2 = "You gonna pay for this!";

//successful attack on PC
$phrase_combat_good_attack0 = "Damn, you're slow, <charname>!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack1 = "Had enough yet?";
$phrase_combat_good_attack2 = "You're as good as dead now!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack3 = "That's gotta hurt!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack4 = "You're bleeding like a pig, <charname>!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack5 = "Just die already!";

that's some scary software design there, Lou.

Glad to see things moving along though! Keep it up.
 

Silellak

Cipher
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,198
Location
Tucson, AZ
obediah said:
Code:
//enemy spotted!
$phrase_enemy_spotted0 = "This should be fun.";
$phrase_enemy_spotted1 = "Prepare to die!";
$phrase_enemy_spotted2 = "I'm gonna fuck you up!";
$phrase_enemy_spotted3 = "Let's see how tough you are!";

//Combat
//threats
$phrase_combat_generic0 = "Come on, I aint got all day.";
$phrase_combat_generic1 = "You don't look like much.";
$phrase_combat_generic2 = "Let's get it over with.";

//NPC is hit
$phrase_combat_pain0 = "Fuck!";
$phrase_combat_pain1 = "Shit, I'm bleeding!";
$phrase_combat_pain2 = "You gonna pay for this!";

//successful attack on PC
$phrase_combat_good_attack0 = "Damn, you're slow, <charname>!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack1 = "Had enough yet?";
$phrase_combat_good_attack2 = "You're as good as dead now!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack3 = "That's gotta hurt!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack4 = "You're bleeding like a pig, <charname>!";
$phrase_combat_good_attack5 = "Just die already!";

that's some scary software design there, Lou.

Glad to see things moving along though! Keep it up.

Let's not derail this thead the same way the ITS forum thread was derailed. Please?

Vault Dweller said:
Added Gareth's and Brian Mitsoda's demo feedback in case you're interested.

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/in ... opic=991.0

Good stuff. I especially enjoy Gareth's screenshot walkthrough. Brian had some pretty great feedback, and I'm curious to see how the developers will respond to it. So far the overwhelming opinion seems to be "too luck based", which is a hard thing to avoid when you have turn-based combat with only one controllable character, as Brian mentioned.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Silellak said:
Let's not derail this thead the same way the ITS forum thread was derailed. Please?

I don't think you have to worry about that:

1) We don't have an army of AoD fanbois trying to prove they are #1 fan.

2) We have enough dabbling programmers to recognize source code, even when it's not a compiled language.

3) 10 comments in 20+ hours - there is nothing to derail.

3) it is bad code, even taking into account the torque "shortcut" definition of arrays.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
It doesn't matter whether it does or doesn't. Obediah clearly recognized source code there, so it must be true. And it's a bad code too, that much should be clearly to anyone. I mean it doesn't even have brackets. Like, do I really have to explain it? What kinda shitty code doesn't even have brackets?
 

Double Ogre

Scholar
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
765
Mitsoda's feedback actually makes much more sense. The game seems to be heavily luck-based, encouraging constant save/load.

I don't think I'll be able to enjoy a game like this. VD's attitude seems to be "our game is so hardcore that you're gonna pull your hair out while playing it".
Vince said:
We strongly believe that the hardcore player doesn't want to be loved, but wants to be kicked in the balls and then kneed in the face.
Frustrating for the sake of being frustrating? Sorry, I'll pass.
Brian Mitsoda said:
My comments on the demo:

There's a lot to like here, and when loaded into the first town, I wanted to talk to people, explore, get quests, and start making friends and enemies. When I stopped playing, I wanted to load it up and try it again. The idea of the arena itself is appealing to me, however, I felt that I probably wasn't getting the same enjoyment out of it that someone who had had time to outfit and tweak their character to suit their play style might.

Right now I find the combat system to be unforgiving to a fault. That's not to say I didn't get better at blazing through the early levels, but because hit points are fixed, later levels become frustrating to the point that they no longer feel tactical, but wholly dependent on luck. To illustrate, I went through the game with the same exact build twice and used the exact same tactics. In the first game, I was defeated by the fourth fighter after being hit with every single one of his attacks. On the second, he seemed less lucky and I seemed to get the good rolls and was able to last long enough to kill him. I don't mind luck in a team-based tactical strategy game, because you can compensate for one character's bad luck by adjusting tactics or healing with other members of your party, but there is no room for adjusting tactics here, you can have one or two bad rounds be the end of you or the wrong equipment/specialization pretty much leave you unable to fight effectively against your opponent. This might be different in the course of the scenarios presented in the actual game, but 1-on-1 fighting definitely does not seem like a strong point. If the game favored the player over the opponent more often, it might feel a little better. If most of the fights involve companions or allies, then that might also make the fights seem fairer.

I understand when I die by making strategically unsound decisions. If I move my mage into hand-to-hand combat in D&D, that's stupid, the mage is toast. If I don't calculate enough AP in X-Com for my soldier to both open and back away from a door, leaving them a sitting duck, that's a bad call on my part and I'm lucky if they don't get shot by a room full of snakemen. I understand and accept my loss when I use ineffective strategies, because that's my fault. But I tend to get frustrated with games when I lose due to streaks of bad luck. If I have mastered the systems of the game, I should be able to repeat the same scenario multiple times and be better at getting through it. A little luck keeps things fresh - too much and it feels more like gambling than skill.

I've played and beat X-Com, Jagged Alliance 1&2, Fallout 1&2, Final Fantasy Tactics, the optional bosses in the Shin Megami Tensei games, and countless other tactical games and RPGs. I've also helped test and shape several systems for multiple games. I would consider myself a "hardcore" gamer. To the contrary of what has been stated before, I don't think hardcore gamers like getting punished - I think that's a bad way of putting it. I think what hardcore gamers want is to not be coddled, to not feel like no matter what they do, the game is always going to pat them on the back and go, "how about one more shot, champ?" They want a challenge, they want risk of failure, but they want a fair fight.

I think one of the problems with a lot of modern games is that they have negated risk, making them less of a game and more of an amusement. Now, for mainstream titles, you need a bit of this or too many people will be frustrated, but even in a smaller title, you need to be careful when balancing your mechanics to not either feel like there's no smart tactical decision to be made or only one viable tactic available for 90% of the combat (although I did not stumble upon "the win" during my time with the game). When the game becomes frustrating or painful to play, players are either going to stop playing or save/load after every turn until they get a satisfying outcome. For the record, though I tried many configurations over several attempts, I was unable to ever get farther than the the sixth fight.

Here are my specific comments on systems and gameplay:

Skill points - can't really get a sense for how these are making my character better in combat and how many I truly need to drop into a skill before I'm mildly proficient with a weapon. The amount needed seems to require specialization, which seems to limit the ability to switch up tactics/equipment when fighting different kinds of enemies. Having an explanation in the description that stated, for example:

1-30 - Untrained

31-50 - Familiar

51-70 - Skilled

71-90 - Expert

91-100 - Deadly

It would also help if I knew if I gained any abilities, perks, or crit chance when I hit certain milestones with the skills.

Icons - Couldn't figure out how to end my turn immediately. Wasn't sure what some of the icons meant or did, figured they had no function in the demo.

Throwing - The cost/damage from Throwing weapons and the need to throw and move with them doesn't seem to be worth it for the amount of distance they cover. Opponents almost always get within striking distance, even if I throw one and move (which would take me dozens of turns to take out some opponents). There's no way to play "keep away" effectively. Since throwing weapons seem to run out before they've done any significant amount of damage to even lightly-armored targets, they don't seem viable. Actually, all ranged weapons seem to leave the player constantly open to attacks of opportunity. If there's height or longer range distances in the actual game, then I can see them being more useful.

To-Hit Percentage - Wasn't always sure the to-hit percentage over the enemy felt accurate. Maybe it is, but whenever I had around 50% chance to-hit, I seemed to miss far more often than I hit. Does that factor in enemy chance to block, my chance to miss, their chance to dodge, or all three?

Spears - The first spear the player can start with has a range of 1. Understand it's a short spear, but would be nice if all polearms had a range of 2 or greater, possibly a penalty to use them up close. Just a matter of expectations for a spear-type weapon.

Attack of Opportunity - Attack of opportunity happens so often and is so brutal to stick and move fighters that I would strongly suggest that the attack of opportunity only triggers if the opponent/player has AP left over from their previous turn. It might even work like that already, but, when my lightly-armored thief is trying to get a quick strike in and back off but gets hit repeatedly by a hammer while he's trying to put some distance in between the heavy guy and him, it kind of leaves him without a valid strategy and also dead. It should cost 1-3 AP AND only trigger once per round.

Fast Attack Vs. Aimed Attack - It seems like the more AP you pump into an attack, the less likely you are to hit. For example, I used a dagger, where Fast Attack = 2 AP, 3 AP = Normal, 4 AP = Power, and Aimed = 5 AP. The chance to hit started at about 70% for Fast Attack and diminishes gradually to the point where Aimed: Head was about 25%. That's five Fast Attacks, likely to do small but constant damage, versus 2 Aimed attacks that are more likely to miss or do slightly more damage than a fast attack (yes, the weapon was weaker, but the principle here is what I'm trying to illustrate). My problem with this is in most games your low AP attacks are less likely to hit and are kind of a desperate measure to get one more attack off before your turn ends. Here, they are pretty good, almost as damaging as the higher AP attacks and more likely to hit. I would expect that if I spent the AP to aim an attack, I'd be more likely to hit, especially if I'm proficient in that weapon. And of course, no matter how good I am, a quick stab/shot is always going to be more of a risk.

For many of the weapons, I felt like there was no need for normal/power attacks, as fast was always good enough for its cost. And I felt that the Aimed attacks were kind of useless, since there don't seem to be any permanent statuses or real bonuses to doing them for the to-hit ratio and benefit of success. For example, I was able to use Aimed attacks on multiple enemies' arms and make them drop their weapon - this felt good. However, all could pick up their weapon and clobber me next turn, so there was no "lose a turn" benefit to taking the risk, and the Aimed attack did minimal damage, so the cost to benefit of the attack ended up being more detrimental to my long term success than had I spammed Fast Attacks. If Aimed were easier to do/cheaper with proficiency and caused real problems for enemies (like knockdown, disarm, lose a turn, halve movement ability, or ignore armor) than they would be worth the expenditure of AP and I would use them all the time. It would also open a more strategic level of play that is currently lacking. For balance, you could even disallow Aimed attacks with weapons until the player had a sufficient Skill to use them.

Crossbows - Knockdown on the crossbow just seems overpowering. Also, if realism was being used to justify it, then realistically it would take an entire turn just to reload a crossbow. I didn't find them satisfying to use and I really didn't like fighting against crossbow enemies. I probably need more time with the weapon, but what I played didn't make me eager to return to this class of weapons. Also, see death by attack of opportunity comment above.

Armor - Okay, I like the basic way that the armor can restrict your abilities a bit instead of allowing the player to just acquire better defense with every suit. I like that you have to match your armor to your strategy. That said, I felt the penalties on a lot of the armors - especially to attack, were too harsh. It would almost make more sense if the armors restricted AP for movement, rather than cut down your ability with every type of weapon. Penalties to movement and dodging make sense and I can see maybe even some forms of attack limited, but the way it penalizes attack right now, you're either better off going with the lightest armor (though a lucky hit will kill you) or the heaviest armor. When armor works, it works well, but too often I felt like I was being restricted by my armor more than being assisted by it.

Difficulty -Would consider a less hardcore mode for the older or more impatient gamers who won't have the time or patience to put up with the difficulty but would still like to play an old-school RPG.

Weapon Types - I couldn't always tell what weapon was influenced by each skill. Labeling the class of the weapon in the description would help immensely.

Escape Button - Escape Button should always bring up an option screen, on any screen. This might be in the works, but if not, this is pretty standard in every game.

As someone mentioned on the forums, I would give serious consideration to doing a combat beta and finding twenty or so dedicated people to play it and give their feedback. They're likely to bring up a lot of issues that designers or the team wouldn't, as well as help balance out the combat weapons and skills. As a demo, I think right now it might turn off people who would be interested in the RPG side of the game. As a beta, I think people would accept that it's not actually the final game and contribute much needed feedback. Like I said, there is some very good stuff in here and the game is not in a state where the whole system needs to be thrown out and replaced, but it does need a lot more polish and some of the major balance/tactical issues fixed before it should be released as a demo.

As always, feel free to discuss, bring up issues, tell me I'm wrong.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Vault Dweller said:
It doesn't matter whether it does or doesn't. Obediah clearly recognized source code there, so it must be true.

Are you trying to make a fool of yourself? It doesn't take Knuth to identify that it is source: C-style comments, $-vars, variable assignment to a string, ;-deliminated expressions. In the ITS forum you even identify it as TorqueScript, so what the fuck are you trying to accomplish?


And it's a bad code too, that much should be clearly to anyone. I mean it doesn't even have brackets. Like, do I really have to explain it? What kinda shitty code doesn't even have brackets?

Huh? You just continue to make a fool of yourself.

It's bad code because:

1: This should be in a data format ( XML, YAML, JSON, ...) not source code.

2: If you absosmurfly, must put this in code, you don't declare each element of an array like that - it's a shit ton of extra work when the list gets long and will cause bugs ( duplicate, missing, out-of-order numbers ). It's the same mistake as explicitely setting page numbers in a book rather than letting the word processor do it. Do something like ( pseudocode ):

Code:
//enemy spotted!
@phrase_enemy_spotted = (
  "This should be fun.",
  "Prepare to die!",
  "I'm gonna fuck you up!",
  "Let's see how tough you are!"
 );

Also...

Code:
//Combat
//threats
$phrase_combat_generic0 = "Come on, I aint got all day.";
$phrase_combat_generic1 = "You don't look like much.";
$phrase_combat_generic2 = "Let's get it over with.";

Comments are only helpful when they are accurate. Is this array for threats or generic messages? Reminds me of this programmer joke.

Code:
// set x to 1
x = 2;

EDIT: None of this is particularly bad for game development, except for the mountains of defensive nonsense you and Nick spewed in response to valid ( if poorly worded ) cricitism.
 

Jasede

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
24,793
Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Codex Year of the Donut I'm very into cock and ball torture
As far as I understand it this is written like that to be easily modifiable since it won't be compiled - it's just a text script file users can open and edit with notepad, and write in their own combat taunts if they want to.

It looks less elegant this way, but it seems easier to understand for people who do not know how to program, but want to modify the game by editing these easy to access text files.
 

cincinnatus.c

Arcane
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
1,620
obediah said:
EDIT: None of this is particularly bad for game development, except for the mountains of defensive nonsense you and Nick spewed in response to valid ( if poorly worded ) cricitism.


Most bizzare defensive nonsense I've witnessed in years.

Re: poor wording, I welcome any suggestions on how I should've formulated my first post* (which wasn't really a criticism, was it?), as I'm still trying to figure out how I managed to turn two persons into a I'm-a-clueless-git-and-I-shall-prove-it automatons.

*in that ITS thread
 

Double Ogre

Scholar
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
765
Gromnir has spoken.
[url=http://forums.obsidian.net/index.php?s=&showtopic=42139&view=findpost&p=961338:18n2rr10]Gromnir[/url] said:
aod is schrodinger's cat. some small number o' people will spend next year or two in ardent debate over the philosophical implications o' aod impact... or non-impact. 'course, at the end o' the day, regardless o' the debate, you still end up with a dead cat in a box. no 'mount o' gaming pretension is gonna be able to breathe life into the grisly gato. 'course, given two years o' emotional investment, some folks is gonna look at vinnie's mummified feline cadaver, and declare it "Teh Best Kat Evar!" folks with no emotional ties to aod is probable never gonna hear of the indie release o' a dated looking game with terrible qa, or they will be baffled by the fanatics who chose to deify a dead cat... in a box. please, think of the cat. take multi-years and uncountable message board posts to kill a cat? nobody every shows no concern for the senseless killings of schrodinger's cat.

HA! Good Fun!
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I suppose, he has a point.
 

thesheeep

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
9,924
Location
Tampere, Finland
Codex 2012 Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Just to clear things up here, as well.

obediah said:
1: This should be in a data format ( XML, YAML, JSON, ...) not source code.

It is. It is actually TorqueScript, or whatever it is called. I keep on wondering why engine devs come up with own scripts instead of just using working ones like LUA or Python. But since this was only some declaration/initialization (I don't know what exactly this is in TorqueScript, tbh) stuff, it doesn't really matter.

May look ugly, and I certainly don't like that way of adressing arrays (since it indeed makes them look like a bunch of single variables). But hey, if it is like that, it is like that ;)
And I really wouldn't call it source code. To me (and everyone in the business I know), source code are all the *.cpp (or whatever language one uses) files only the devs will be able to see. And once the program is compiled and released, only the script files remain to be seen (and changed) by anyone.
Then again, some people just call everything "source code" that is written in a way "only programmers could do"...


obediah said:
2: If you absosmurfly, must put this in code, you don't declare each element of an array like that - it's a shit ton of extra work when the list gets long and will cause bugs ( duplicate, missing, out-of-order numbers ). It's the same mistake as explicitely setting page numbers in a book rather than letting the word processor do it. Do something like ( pseudocode ):

Code:
//enemy spotted!
@phrase_enemy_spotted = (
  "This should be fun.",
  "Prepare to die!",
  "I'm gonna fuck you up!",
  "Let's see how tough you are!"
 );

Not really a valid point, since this is not source code... But anyway..
What if this nicer way is just not possible with that TorqueScript?
I don't see any reason to blame anyone here.


obediah said:
Comments are only helpful when they are accurate. Is this array for threats or generic messages?

True, but pretty much nitpicking...


obediah said:
None of this is particularly bad for game development, except for the mountains of defensive nonsense you and Nick spewed in response to valid ( if poorly worded ) cricitism.

I read all that stuff and seriously, especially Nick was only trying to explain why this is NOT source code. And really, it isn't. The guy complaining obviously didn't understand that and went on bitching. Then Vince came in to save the day. End of story.
 

cincinnatus.c

Arcane
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
1,620
thesheeep said:
Just to clear things up here, as well.


It is. It is actually TorqueScript, or whatever it is called. I keep on wondering why engine devs come up with own scripts instead of just using working ones like LUA or Python.

http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0263/

how do you think: why its called "Defining Python Source Code Encodings"?

thesheeep said:
But since this was only some declaration/initialization (I don't know what exactly this is in TorqueScript, tbh) stuff, it doesn't really matter.

May look ugly, and I certainly don't like that way of adressing arrays (since it indeed makes them look like a bunch of single variables). But hey, if it is like that, it is like that ;)
And I really wouldn't call it source code. To me (and everyone in the business I know), source code are all the *.cpp (or whatever language one uses) files only the devs will be able to see. And once the program is compiled and released, only the script files remain to be seen (and changed) by anyone.
Then again, some people just call everything "source code" that is written in a way "only programmers could do"...

omg

http://www.linfo.org/sourcecode.html

source is what programmer writes, that's why its called "source" rather than "target".
that's the standard terminology since the dark ages. open your Dragon Book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon_Boo ... er_science)) . Thats a standard textbook (since 80s) for your typical Compiler Design 101. Aho/Ullman consequently calls "source code"/"source program" the very thing that will be supplied as an input to compiler/interpreter.
 

thesheeep

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
9,924
Location
Tampere, Finland
Codex 2012 Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
First of all, I don't give a shit about what some guys defined in the 80s. Especially not if they are that misleading.
Definitions are what they are currently, not in the past. And currently, my "definition" definately applies.


cincinnatus.c said:
source is what programmer writes, that's why its called "source" rather than "target".

And script files are (typically) not being written by the programmer, but by the game designers. The interpreter is written by the programmer. And whatever files define the interpreter are source code. Not the files it reads.

cincinnatus.c said:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0263/

how do you think: why its called "Defining Python Source Code Encodings"?
Oh, very well. Call it source code, if you feel like. Because it "stands in the book".
But at least have the decency to call it "script source code", because everything else will lead to the confusion you encountered here and there.
Since, and seriously, you can trust me here, nobody in the industry (at least not in this country) refers to scripts as "source code"...
 

aboyd

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
843
Location
USA
thesheeep said:
obediah said:
1: This should be in a data format ( XML, YAML, JSON, ...) not source code.
It is. It is actually TorqueScript, or whatever it is called.
:shock:

You plainly don't know what a data format is. I don't agree with obediah that it should be in a data format, but I sure as hell know that TorqueScript is for scripting and is in no way a data format.

Yeesh.
 

cincinnatus.c

Arcane
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
1,620
thesheeep said:
First of all, I don't give a shit about what some guys defined in the 80s. Especially not if they are that misleading.
Definitions are what they are currently, not in the past. And currently, my "definition" definately applies.

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. A sheep vs Ullman/Aho.

BTW: its not about just one book, really. Its a standard terminology, most basic one.You dont like the most famous book on Compiler Design? Fine, show me any other book that supports your "terminology".
I hope you're not another "programmer" who don't read books and don't need a school, are you?


thesheeep said:
Oh, very well. Call it source code, if you feel like. Because it "stands in the book".
But at least have the decency to call it "script source code", because everything else will lead to the confusion you encountered here and there.
Since, and seriously, you can trust me here, nobody in the industry (at least not in this country) refers to scripts as "source code"...


Nobody in the industry?
www.python.org is not an industry? Then what it is?

Java is both compiled and interpreted. Are java files source code in your "industry"? How about Smalltalk? How about Prolog?
 

spectre

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
5,370
Holy shite, can we just drop the script thing and carry on with our lives?
If they're using it and have a demo there's reasons to believe it friggin works.
If it's human readable an easily editable, so much the better for modders (and a sequel mayhap).
No reason to get more anal than this.


Hmm. Seems to me there's no group combat in the demo yet. Shame, I was kinda hoping for some teamwork.
Also, means a bit more time to get the algorithms right. Next Thursday it is then.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom